Speak for yourself. I did say distinctly Hingis began declining very early in her career (or at a very early age), and was already on decline by 2001, maybe before that. That is one reason she isnt as great either. Poor longevity. To be in decline at 19 and retired at 21 is piss poor longevity for even an era great. Henin even has much better lognevity, as Venus's is light years beyond either, and dont even get into Serena. Heck Davenport, Sharapova, Pierce, Clijsters, any player with multiple slams from her era has much better longevity.

It's very very obvious you overrated them to underrate Hingis. Which is not necessary, really.

It's very very obvious you overrated them to underrate Hingis. Which is not necessary, really.

Who do I overrate. I rate Serena, Venus, and Henin as greater players than Hingis. They all are, and most everyone considers them so. I dont rate Davenport a greater player, but at her best she beats Hingis at her best, especialy on any neutral type court (hard court) or faster court. That is also true. I said Hingis's longevity for a top player is very poor (it is) and inferior to pretty much all the multi slam champions of the last 15 years, I didnt say she was overall a poorer player than all of them, just that particular aspect was. Again this is true. I have said nothing that isnt the complete truth, and nobody have I overrated.

Fair enough, so Hingis played with injured feet with most of the 2001-2002 (resulting to Tacchini lawsuit), not that hard for others to win then, is it?

True. Those statements are not contradictory at all. Taking power off from your shots or serve does NOT necessarily lead to improved reliability. Anyone who has ever played tennis understands this, but it is hard to actually implement if you have lost confidence in your shots. It's same thing what happened to her forehand.

Martina's best first serves were at 170km/h+ at her peak, late 2001 they had dropped to 130km/h.

Man, she must have been luckiest player alive to achieve winning or even record against most of the prominent baseliners of her time.

Here's bit of logic for you: when you have 1000 point lead over your closest competitor, how does it help your ranking to play a tournament which gives you 250 points if you win it? That's right.

You still haven't answered my question concerning her 1st serve percentage against the Big Babes.

Moreover, I've already stated that Hingis is deserving of her achievements, but that posters need not embellish on these achievements. As her record speaks for itself.

In reference to the feet injury incurred by wearing the wrong shoes...
That argument only applies if her feet were affected during that time.
And during that period, Hingis never once complained about her feet. At least, not that I read of.
Maybe you are correct, I will just say that, Hingis, to her credit, played pretty damn good after coming back from foot surgery.
But, hey, no biggie.

Let's not start waxing melodramatic in this discussion.
You have made some interesting points, but when you go off in a melodramatic fashion, you give the impression of having already lost the debate.
I'm not your enemy, nor am I a Hingis-Hater.
And I'm certainly not suggesting that Hingis failed against all of her opponents.
That would be disingenuous, and frankly, ridiculous.
You seem to give the impression that this is what I'm putting forth.

What I am saying...and I want to be clear on this...is that Hingis had known difficulties competing with the Big Babes at a time when Big Babe tennis was being played by the top 20 players in the latter part of the 90s onward. Regardless of foot injuries; because she was soundly defeating the majority of her opponents.
Again, I provided names of players that gave her problems.
However, for whatever reason, you have decided to completely disregard that portion of both of my posts, and not respond to my query.
It's all good though.

Anyway, I stand by my statements concerning her not being over-rated, but that she definitely had problems competing with Big Babe, Power Base-liners. You have an opinion, and I have mine. But you really shouldn't make a habit of avoiding direct queries because doing so does nothing to support your arguments, nor Hingis' record against the likes of Capriati, Venus, Serena, and Davenport. Again, players that she regularly competed against and that gave her enormous problems; even before the reported foot injury.
Remember, she was hyped as a tennis "genius", right?

I kind of curious though....

I seem to recall a few statements made by Hingis, concerning why she refused to change her serve and improve her strength-conditioning. I sorta recall articles where her mom/coach suggested to her that she improve her conditioning and serve (on seperate occassions) in order to compete with the Big Babes; which I thought was also echoed by commentators and sports journalists during post-match interviews. What are you recollection of these articles and interviews?

Some claimed laziness, and others claimed stubbornness on the part of Hingis for not changing in order to keep up with the Big Babes.
Do you have any recollections of these statements made over the years?
And was there a statement made by Hingis about not wanting to look like a (paraphrasing) bodybuilder, being the primary reason for not doing strength-conditioning?

I don't want to jump to any conclusions that may bring about further misunderstandings.
Just wondered about your recollection of the previous questions, as well as my original concerning her 1st serve percentage record against Davenport, Venus, Capriati, and Serena.

__________________Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery. -Malcolm XA man who stands for nothing will fall for anything. -Malcolm XOur greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall. -ConfuciusThe greatest scholars are not usually the wisest people. - Geoffrey Chaucer

I dont know where Sharapova came into this thread but for what its worth no Sharapova does not rank above Hingis yet. She has 1 fewer major, as much as the #1 stats are overrated she is glaringly behind in those too. Hingis was also dominant at the Australian and had a dominant year in 1997, where Sharapova isnt dominant ever or anywhere. If Sharapova wins a 5th slam it would be closer because of the career slam, but really Sharapova needs 6 slams to rank over Hingis, and possibly a year end #1 too. As much as Hingis vultured a really weak field January 1997-January 1998 she atleast capatilized fully on it, so kudos and credit to her for that, while Maria has had a really weak field to play with the last few years and hasnt taken the same advantage, blowing several winnable slam finals and semis.

Prime to prime though I think Sharapova would win. Sharapova is similar to Davenport with better movement and much more fight, and we all know prime Lindsay owned prime Martina. I know the Hingistards will point out Martina crushing Maria once in 2006 past her prime but that was an aberration as Maria came back to very easily win their next 2 matches. It was the first time they ever played, Maria probably found Hingis's game hard to get used to at first since nobody plays that style of tennis anymore.

I feel like she could have done much more! She was just too young when she achieved everything she did. If she would have been a few years older when she did everything she could have done more. I feel like everyone always forgot how old she was when she made the comments and did everything. She was a teenager! She won 5 grand slams before she was even 20! I feel like she really didn't care much towards the end, she had everything. She was rich and successful on the court, all she really need was a FO singles title.

To put a broader perspective on Martina: another problem with her is that since her early childhood she basically pursued two completely different sports - the first one professionally, the other one as a past-time activity.

When she was 3, they moved from Slovakia - where she started hitting the ball as a 2-year-old kid - to a little rural town in east Czech Rep. where she developed her tennis skills AND fell in love with horse-riding. This continued in Switzerland.

I read couple of Czech or English interviews with her and I really think that this girl loves horse-riding as much as playing tennis.

Tennis was basically 'imposed' on her by her ambitious mother, while horse-riding was her free choice.

That's why I think she had no problem to retire at just 22 on a huge pile of cash. I've read somewhere that today she rides her horses four times a week and even spent a month in Portugal at some equestrian competition.

BTW, it's common knowledge that she fell off a horse before the 1997 RG final.

So overall I think that tennis was not everything for this girl and that's why she underachieved and had no problem staying four years away from the tour before her relatively sucessful comeback.

To put a broader perspective on Martina: another problem with her is that since her early childhood she basically pursued two completely different sports - the first one professionally, the other one as a past-time activity.

When she was 3, they moved from Slovakia - where she started hitting the ball as a 2-year-old kid - to a little rural town in east Czech Rep. where she developed her tennis skills AND fell in love with horse-riding. This continued in Switzerland.

I read couple of Czech or English interviews with her and I really think that this girl loves horse-riding as much as playing tennis.

Tennis was basically 'imposed' on her by her ambitious mother, while horse-riding was her free choice.

That's why I think she had no problem to retire at just 22 on a huge pile of cash. I've read somewhere that today she rides her horses four times a week and even spent a month in Portugal at some equestrian competition.

BTW, it's common knowledge that she fell off a horse before the 1997 RG final.

So overall I think that tennis was not everything for this girl and that's why she underachieved and had no problem staying four years away from the tour before her relatively sucessful comeback.

But it was actually good that tennis wasn't everything for her, when she wasn't much in shape and did everything for fun and out of pure talent is when she shined the most, when she started to take it seriously and began to want to win a GS so bad again it's when she became to tank in Grand Slam finals.

Anyway, I stand by my statements concerning her not being over-rated, but that she definitely had problems competing with Big Babe, Power Base-liners. You have an opinion, and I have mine. But you really shouldn't make a habit of avoiding direct queries because doing so does nothing to support your arguments, nor Hingis' record against the likes of Capriati, Venus, Serena, and Davenport. Again, players that she regularly competed against and that gave her enormous problems; even before the reported foot injury.

Of course, glass can be half full. You could just as well say that Hingis gave problems to power players who generally swept aside other players w/ similar games. Just how bad was Martina against power players?

So it seems that pretty much only player of note she had lopsided record against was Graf. It's of course debatable whether some of those mentioned are "power players". Lots of people nowadays seem to think that Graf would be blown off the court by ITF event level players, for example.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RVD

I seem to recall a few statements made by Hingis, concerning why she refused to change her serve and improve her strength-conditioning. I sorta recall articles where her mom/coach suggested to her that she improve her conditioning and serve (on seperate occassions) in order to compete with the Big Babes; which I thought was also echoed by commentators and sports journalists during post-match interviews. What are you recollection of these articles and interviews?

Teenage Martina was viewed as somewhat lazy in her practice. It was obvious during 1998 she was clearly out-of-shape much of the year. She improved her fitness regime considerably after that, culminating in 2001 AO where she was in great shape and outlasted Serena in a gruelling duel. I recall that in some point she claimed to have tried enhanced weight training but that it screwed her stroke mechanics. Tennis players in general often don't like changing things.

Huge biceps don't necessarily make tennis players hit harder. In fact some of the hardest hitters are pretty skinny.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RVD

Just wondered about your recollection of the previous questions, as well as my original concerning her 1st serve percentage record against Davenport, Venus, Capriati, and Serena.

I'd answer that question if I understood what exactly is what you're asking. I don't have original statlines around anymore.

__________________"Backhands should be hit with two hands, as should forehands. A Selesian's strength flows from the Holy Groundstrokes, but beware: sliced backhands, Graf forehands - the dark side of Selesianity are they. Easily they flow, but if once you start down the dark path, forever will Graf damnate your destiny - consume you she will..."

But it was actually good that tennis wasn't everything for her, when she wasn't much in shape and did everything for fun and out of pure talent is when she shined the most, when she started to take it seriously and began to want to win a GS so bad again it's when she became to tank in Grand Slam finals.

And that's why everything looked so effortless and natural.

I loved how Monica Seles (during the Paris exho this year) said something like "Martina was always better than me" (see the lopsided H2H of 15-5 in Martina's favour)